The invention pertains to control systems and, more particularly, to methods and apparatus for networking, configuring and operating field devices, controllers, consoles and other control devices.
The terms “control” and “control systems” refer to the control of a device or system by monitoring one or more of its characteristics. This is used to insure that output, processing, quality and/or efficiency remain within desired parameters over the course of time. In many control systems, digital data processing or other automated apparatus monitor a device, process or system and automatically adjust its operational parameters. In other control systems, such apparatus monitor the device, process or system and display alarms or other indicia of its characteristics, leaving responsibility for adjustment to the operator.
Control is used in a number of fields. Process control, for example, is employed in the manufacturing sector for process, repetitive and discrete manufactures, though, it also has wide application in utility and other service industries. Environmental control finds application in residential, commercial, institutional and industrial settings, where temperature and other environmental factors must be properly maintained. Control is also used in articles of manufacture, from toasters to aircraft, to monitor and control device operation.
Modern day control systems typically include a combination of field devices, controllers, workstations and other more powerful digital data processing apparatus, the functions of which may overlap or be combined. Field devices include temperature, flow and other sensors that measure characteristics of the subject device, process or system. They also include valves and other actuators that mechanically, electrically, magnetically, or otherwise effect the desired control.
Controllers generate settings for the control devices based on measurements from sensor type field devices. Controller operation is typically based on a “control algorithm” that maintains a controlled system at a desired level, or drives it to that level, by minimizing differences between the values measured by the sensors and, for example, a setpoint defined by the operator.
Workstations, control stations and the like are typically used to configure and monitor the process as a whole. They are often also used to execute higher-levels of process control, e.g., coordinating groups of controllers and responding to alarm conditions occurring within them.
In a food processing plant, for example, a workstation coordinates controllers that actuate conveyors, valves, and the like, to transport soup stock and other ingredients to a processing vessel. The workstation also configures and monitors the controllers that maintain the contents of that vessel at a simmer or low boil. The latter operate, for example, by comparing measurements of vapor pressure in the processing vessel with a desired setpoint. If the vessel pressure is too low, the control algorithm may call for incrementally opening the heating gas valves, thereby, driving the pressure and boiling activity upwards. As the pressure approaches the desired setpoint, the algorithm requires incrementally leveling the valves to maintain the roil of the boil.
The field devices, controllers, workstations and other components that make up a process control system typically communicate over heterogeneous media. Field devices connect with controllers, for example, over dedicated “fieldbuses” operating under proprietary or industry-specific protocols. Examples of these are FoxCom(™), Profibus, ControlNet, ModBus, DeviceNet, among others. The controllers themselves may be connected to one another, as well as to workstations, via backplane or other proprietary high-speed dedicated buses, such as Nodebus(™). Communications among workstations and plant or enterprise-level processors may be via Ethernet networks or other Internet Protocol (IP) networks.
Control device manufacturers, individually, and the control industry, as a whole, have pushed for some uniformity among otherwise competing communication standards. The Foundation Fieldbus, for example, is the result of an industry-wide effort to define a uniform protocol for communications among processor-equipped (or “intelligent”) field devices. Efforts such as this have been limited to specific segments of the control hierarchy (e.g., bus communications among field devices) and are typically hampered by technological changes that all to soon render the standards obsolete.
Still less uniform are the command and operation of control devices. Though field devices may function at the direction of controllers and controllers, in turn, at the direction of workstations (or other plant-level processors), proprietary mechanisms within the individual components determine how they perform their respective functions. Even the commands for invoking those functions may be manufacturer- or product-specific. Thus, the commands necessary to drive actuators of one manufacturer will differ from those of another. How the corresponding commands are processed internally within the actuators differ still more (though, hopefully, the results achieved are the same). The specific programming codes used to effect a given control algorithm likewise differs among competing makes, as do those of the higher-level control processors.
Industry efforts toward harmonization of software for command and operation of control devices have focused on editing languages that define process control algorithms. This is distinct from the codes used to effect those algorithms within control devices and, rather, concerns software “tools” available to users to specify the algorithms, e.g., editors including IEC-1131 standard languages such as Field Blocks, Sequential Function Charts (SFC), Ladder Logic and Structured Text.
Less concerted are industry moves to extend monitoring and limited configuration capabilities beyond in-plant consoles, e.g., to remote workstations. An example of this was the abortive Java for Distributed Control (JDC) effort, which proposed enabling in-plant workstations to serve web pages to remote Java bytecode-enabled client computers. The latter used the to web pages to monitor and set control parameters which the workstations, in turn, incorporated into their own control schemes.
An academic system along these same lines was suggested by the Mercury Project of the University of Southern California, proposing the use of a web browser to enable remote users to control a robotic arm via a server that controlled the arm. A related company-specific effort included that announced by Tribe Computer Works that allegedly enabled users to manage routers and remote access servers over IP networks using web browser software. See, “Tribe Defines Net Management Role For Web Browser Software,” Network World, May 22, 1995, at p. 14.
Thus sets the stage for the present invention, an object of which is to provide improved methods and apparatus for networking, configuring and operating field devices, controllers, consoles and other control devices. A related object is to provide such methods and apparatus for process control.
Further objects of the invention are to provide such methods and apparatus as reduce the confusion, complexity and costs attendant to prior art control systems.
Related objects of the invention are to provide such methods and apparatus as can be implemented with commercial off the shelf hardware and software. Still further objects of the invention are to provide such methods and apparatus as achieve confusion-, complexity- and cost-reduction without hampering manufacturer creativity and without removing incentives to development of product differentiators.